Louisiana v. Callais · ¶172

But the majority is not yet done thwarting Congress's objective. Maybe in some exceptional case, a State will fail to assert a goal, like political gerrymandering, that the plaintiff's map cannot replicate. Then, the majority's makeover of the second and third Gingles preconditions comes into play, again to convert Section 2 into its opposite—a statute turning on discriminatory intent, not effects. Contra, Allen, 599 U. S., at 25 (“§ 2 turns on the presence of discriminatory effects, not discriminatory intent”). Until today, the second and third preconditions focused simply on racially polarized voting: Plaintiffs had to show that minority citizens vote cohesively, but cannot elect their preferred candidates because majority citizens vote as a bloc for others. See supra, at 144–145. Now the majority introduces a new requirement to impede Section 2 suits: “[T]he plaintiffs must provide…

preliminary print (page proof)
Source edition
Passage preview. Read in context for the complete text, notes and references.